26 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHImportance of PPI
Leading reported evidence
Use " cars
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
It was surprising to see how many of those "used" cars with low miles had Type IIs.
Leading evidence: 'Use " cars' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Check abuse is looking at the maintenance history - fluid' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Check abuse is looking at the maintenance history - fluid
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Of course, another check for abuse is looking at the maintenance history - fluid changes, major/minor services, etc.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Very good idea on buying the code scanner and checking codes.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Of course, another check for abuse is looking at the maintenance history - fluid changes, major/minor services, etc.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion · Original poster
I had to run away from the car, I was sad but happy at the same time...lesson of the story: ALWAYS GET A PPI!!
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
26 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261027T192637Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Last week I found a 01 996TT in my area with 35k miles for sale at a non-P dealership for $52k, I test drove the car the same day I saw it and brought my 996 C2 to trade it in, they appraised my car and we arranged everything for me to buy the TT. I drove the TT for the whole day before buying it (the dealer let me take it home for a whole day) I was kinda wishing everything was ok, the car looked great and felt great.. but I knew that I HAD to do the damn PPI, $250 and 4 hours later I get a call from my P-dealer.. bad news.... 49356 Type 1 and 4988 Type 2 overrevs, leaks all over the place, front diff was pretty much hanging from the axle and it was dry.. it had leaked all the fliud.. the engine was modified and some wires were fixed with duct tape!, the 30k service was never performed, the oil looked like mud.. the total amount of work the car needed was $20-25k assuming the engine internals were ok... I mean the list was soo long.... I had to run away from the car, I was sad but happy at the same time...lesson of the story: ALWAYS GET A PPI!!
That's the best $250 spent in your case to prevent a 'major' dissapointment down the road. Smart move on your part. It's so easy to fall in love with a pcar, especially a turbo, and then overlook some of its faults just to find out it was a bad car to own. You need to pat yourself on the back, you just avoided a huge mistake by having a PPI.
Type 1s only means that it bumped off the rev-limiter....No big deal. BUT 4988 ignitions in the Type 2 range IMHO would be cause for alarm. I wouldn't want to *inherit* a car that has seen 11-12K RPMS (money shift?)....
Great post, and an all-important reminder to P-Car enthusiasts..
Thanks,
-Blake
Almost 50,000 times hitting the rev limiter, sounds like the original owner was just a plain idiot.
Thousands of times hitting a Type 2 clearly indicates an idiot with more money than sense.
Actually, it would refer to 50,000 "ignitions" rather than times. With that said, 50,000 ignitions would infer that he hit the rev limiter *often*. It sounds like he drove the car hard AND then put it to bed wet so to speak.... Not a good combination.
I once came across a 13K example of a 1992 911 America Roadster (turbo look Cab) owned by Eddie Murphy. Let's just say the car was trashed and had been bottomed out numerous times. Lucky for him, that 964 did not have the computer "memories" of today...
-Blake
Nice catch - money well spent on the PPI
Sounds like an abused car - make sure you inform the non-P dealership in writing, so that they are forced to disclose this known information to a future buyer
Sounds like you are indeed wrong...The "counts" are the number of ignitions. There are 3 ignitions per rev....so at 7000 rpm you get 350 ignitions/sec. 50000 counts would be 143 seconds in over-rev (type I) condition. 4988 would be 14 seconds...of type II....I would run still.
No worries. I purchased the Durametric Scan Tool ($250) to read ECUs when looking to buy my 996 GT3. It was surprising to see how many of those "used" cars with low miles had Type IIs. It was more surprising to the sale people who would see me pull out my laptop and plug it into the port near the driver's footwell. Most did not approve of such tactics, but it saved me the cost of a PPI as my "first pass" assessment....
-Blake
Forgive my ignorance, but if the rev limiter cuts off fuel and spark, causing the revs to "bounce" down from the limit, how do you get a type 2 overrev? Just from going so fast into the limiter that it goes way over??
Just to put this into perspective... you could easily do this on one trip to the drag strip. It does not indicate an abused car (although other things that you said did indicate such), it just says that the car has been driven hard for just over 2 minutes in the course of it's life.
Gotta put things in perspective.
Type 2 overrevs come from a missed downshift, ie 5 to 2 instead of 5 to 4. I would imagine that it's not too hard to get that many ignitions from one or two missed downshifts if you think about it. True, it's potentially a bad thing, but I don't think it's a sure sign of "abuse". As for type 1 overrevs, I know I've hit the limiter on two separate occasions running out of 2nd gear while merging onto the highway. Totally benign situations in my opinion. I agree, the dry differential and neglected oil are another matter entirely.
There are enough of these cars out there, that you'll find one in the shape you want that will pass a PPI with flying colors.
Pass on this car and tell the dealer you're just not interested at any price.
I don't know if this car is a candidate for a CPO or aftermarket warranty, but if it is, the type 2 over-revs are the dealers' trump card... i.e. if the engine blows up, they'll point to the over-revs and say the engine was abused and it wasn't a manufacturing defect.
And that is the key... Many people that track their 911 exclusively dealt with this issue with the dealers when making a warranty claim in recent years. With the 997, I understand that they track 5 RPM levels (don't quote me) so as to help make *subjective* assessments regarding voiding the warranty. I'm sure there is a positive marketing spin for it, but I can't think of one offhand...
And regarding the question: Are Type IIs indicative of abuse? Clearly, I think it is abuse. Sending your engine to 12K RPMs due to a Type II Overrev is a serious problem. You might not blow the engine, but will weaken components... Of course, another check for abuse is looking at the maintenance history - fluid changes, major/minor services, etc. Lack of documentation is a warning sign...
My $0.02,
-Blake
